Adirondack Forum  
Rules Membership Donations and Online Store Adkhighpeaks Foundation ADKhighpeaks Forums ADKhighpeaks Wiki Disclaimer

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > General Adirondack Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-14-2018, 11:02 AM   #221
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Lucky, I’m not 100% sure I understand your point here, but I respectfully disagree that a 3.5 mile walk for the general public would be considered an “elite” management plan...?
And do you have any examples of where “education in wise use” is working elsewhere, in regards to easy access?
Institute a permit system as in hunting and require a course. While there are still accidents involving hunters, they have been greatly reduced by requiring the course, which has been greatly improved over the years. And there are FWMA and state forest areas all over the place that do not get trashed by hunters, problems are generally caused by local teenagers having drinking parties.

Or put the gate back at the main road, and close the ponds to fishing. A distance that is convenient to you in your youth may be impossible for you when you get older. Like I say, there is already a road, and the ponds are only "ponds" because of a man made dam. A lot of the distinctions leading to a " wilderness" designation are arbitrary, which I perceive as establishing "elitist cadres" often at the expense of the excluded. As all this expansion of opportunity for some is paid for from the general fund, as a resident taxpayer, I am being made to subsidize the recreation of the subset of users (many of whom are not resident taxpayers) who don't mind and/or are able to make long walks. Also, if you want to walk further, feel free. I will investigate the permit system, and drive further to get the gate key.
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 01:36 PM   #222
Creekwader
Snag Locator
 
Creekwader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In the Place of the Nettles
Posts: 912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
As I clearly stated, I am unable to download the report. Thank you for your Herculean effort to facilitate the actual transfer of the information in question, rather than your possibly biased summary. When an agency or an organization contracts researchers to evaluate its projects, it is often subject to suspicion of bias. I refer you to many reports published by the tobacco and mining industries.

If someone around there is unhappy with the regulations, unfortunately even three miles is unlikely to prevent them from doing something. Facilitating access to resources and educating people in wise use of them would go a loo further and not give people the sense that things are being managed by elitists for elitists.
Scientists in tobacco and mining are company employees and are therefore frequently ethically challenged by the carrot/stick approach of termination threats and payoffs from industries with billion dollar pocketbooks. Your poor analogy still doesn't explain why Spencer Bruce of the NYS Museum would be compromised enough to fabricate a simple DNA study. The question you should be asking is why this report was published 11/17, well after the 'powers that be' decided upon their preferred land management strategy. I'll admit to have only tangentially followed the Boreas classification but nowhere have I seen any discussion of the potential for a heritage strain or any concern for protecting it. Weird that I happened to trip over this by accident while nobody else involved in this process mentioned it.
Creekwader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 02:00 PM   #223
Creekwader
Snag Locator
 
Creekwader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In the Place of the Nettles
Posts: 912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
Institute a permit system as in hunting and require a course. While there are still accidents involving hunters, they have been greatly reduced by requiring the course, which has been greatly improved over the years. And there are FWMA and state forest areas all over the place that do not get trashed by hunters, problems are generally caused by local teenagers having drinking parties.

Or put the gate back at the main road, and close the ponds to fishing. A distance that is convenient to you in your youth may be impossible for you when you get older. Like I say, there is already a road, and the ponds are only "ponds" because of a man made dam. A lot of the distinctions leading to a " wilderness" designation are arbitrary, which I perceive as establishing "elitist cadres" often at the expense of the excluded. As all this expansion of opportunity for some is paid for from the general fund, as a resident taxpayer, I am being made to subsidize the recreation of the subset of users (many of whom are not resident taxpayers) who don't mind and/or are able to make long walks. Also, if you want to walk further, feel free. I will investigate the permit system, and drive further to get the gate key.
Boreas ponds are in fact natural ponds, just enlarged by a dam. If the dam goes, there will be three ponds.

Don't you think the tired arguments of 'I'm a taxpayer so I can drive wherever I want on public land' or 'the elites are out to get me' are getting old? These have been discussed here and elsewhere ad nauseam.
Creekwader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 02:01 PM   #224
JohnnyVirgil
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Porter Corners, NY
Posts: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
As all this expansion of opportunity for some is paid for from the general fund, as a resident taxpayer, I am being made to subsidize the recreation of the subset of users (many of whom are not resident taxpayers) who don't mind and/or are able to make long walks.
Yeah, I can see that. But technically, I could say the same thing about money spent on snowmobile bridges, single track bike trails, trout stocking, or whatever other recreation-type work is done for things that I don't participate in.
JohnnyVirgil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 02:39 PM   #225
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyVirgil View Post
Yeah, I can see that. But technically, I could say the same thing about money spent on snowmobile bridges, single track bike trails, trout stocking, or whatever other recreation-type work is done for things that I don't participate in.
Snowmobilers and trout fishers (and hunters and trappers) pay user fees in the form of licenses, or vehicles registrations, and fishermen (and hunters) also pay excise taxes on the gear that they buy that are returned to the states based on number of licenses sold (user population) and are dedicated funds for things like habitat improvement, from which hikers and others also benefit. I have not encountered any improved bike trails where I've been in the Park, they are basically all old log roads, but bikes are relay getting a free ride, too. ATV operators get scr***d the worst because they have to pay for registration and insurance, and then there is almost no State Land where they are allowed to ride.
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 02:41 PM   #226
Fly Rodder
Member
 
Fly Rodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 172
There is no bias in a wilderness designation preventing someone from fishing an Adirondack pond. There are hundreds of accessible fishing locations.

Why don't people sue for not being able to access Cedar Lakes for fishing? There used to be a road there as well.
Fly Rodder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 02:48 PM   #227
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 251
"Don't you think the tired arguments of 'I'm a taxpayer so I can drive wherever I want on public land' or 'the elites are out to get me' are getting old? These have been discussed here and elsewhere ad nauseam."

I never said anywhere I want on State land, I clearly stated that I have no problem with being told no roads will be built into "wilderness." I never stated "the elites are out to get me." I do object to pre-existing resources being closed to use to access man made structures or other features in newly acquired areas, thereby creating a "preserve" for those who want to walk, or crawl if they see fit, through the woods. And if the heritage strain is so "rare" unique, and valuable, I am suggesting that three miles is probably not enough, just make it off limits to all fishing and use it as a hatchery pond, like Horn Lake was for so long, and put the gate out at the paved road, or does that make the hike too long and unacceptable for you.
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 02:59 PM   #228
serotonin
ember
 
serotonin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
just make it off limits to all fishing...
and put the gate out at the paved road, or does that make the hike too long and unacceptable for you.

I find that acceptable.





(But, you forgot to blow up the dam).
__________________
The fishing was really good for 10,000 years.
serotonin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 03:04 PM   #229
DuctTape
Out of Shape
 
DuctTape's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,748
Much of what is rather wild in our wilderness areas also had significant man-made structures before (and sometimes after) they were acquired by the State. The decision to designate them as wilderness areas was not due to absence of man's influence, but instead on the uniqueness of the environment. Thus the decision to allow nature to reclaim old roads, or the our willful dismantling of structures to speed up the natural course of reclamation. Thus, for me, it isn't about the current state, but what it could be. I am reminded of the Greek priverb, "Society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they will never sit in."
__________________
"There's a whisper on the night-wind, there's a star agleam to guide us, And the Wild is calling, calling . . . let us go." -from "The Call of the Wild" by Robert Service

My trail journal: DuctTape's Journal
DuctTape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 03:22 PM   #230
geogymn
Member
 
geogymn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by serotonin View Post
I find that acceptable.





(But, you forgot to blow up the dam).
Me too!
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden
geogymn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 05:04 PM   #231
Neil
Kayak-46
 
Neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuctTape View Post
Much of what is rather wild in our wilderness areas also had significant man-made structures before (and sometimes after) they were acquired by the State. The decision to designate them as wilderness areas was not due to absence of man's influence, but instead on the uniqueness of the environment. Thus the decision to allow nature to reclaim old roads, or the our willful dismantling of structures to speed up the natural course of reclamation. Thus, for me, it isn't about the current state, but what it could be. I am reminded of the Greek priverb, "Society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they will never sit in."
Great post!
When I think of land that is designated as wilderness I don't think of what has gone on there prior to the designation. I think about what will NOT happen after the designation has been applied.

The wilderness designation (in my mind) is less a reflection of what the land is like but what sort of protection it has against new development. For example, for a lot of people the High Peaks Wilderness is anything but a wilderness. But, ski resorts, condos, golf course, snowmo trails and so on will never be built there.
__________________
The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.
Neil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 05:12 PM   #232
Lucky13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
Great post!
When I think of land that is designated as wilderness I don't think of what has gone on there prior to the designation. I think about what will NOT happen after the designation has been applied.

The wilderness designation (in my mind) is less a reflection of what the land is like but what sort of protection it has against new development. For example, for a lot of people the High Peaks Wilderness is anything but a wilderness. But, ski resorts, condos, golf course, snowmo trails and so on will never be built there.
Without a Constitutional Amendment! Certainly, places like the back side of Lake Placid could start looking very desirable to a cash strapped legislature facing the bills for ever expanding entitlement programs in other part of the state.
Lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 05:31 PM   #233
MTVhike
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Elizabethtown
Posts: 146
Last winter, when it was too icy on the Jackrabbit trail, I went to the Gulf Brook road and it was a rather nice ski, although still a little "shallow". The snowmobile tracks didn't help, but I guess they won't be there this year.
MTVhike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 07:23 PM   #234
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creekwader View Post
...I'll admit to have only tangentially followed the Boreas classification but nowhere have I seen any discussion of the potential for a heritage strain or any concern for protecting it. Weird that I happened to trip over this by accident while nobody else involved in this process mentioned it.
Just an FYI this was discussed & talked about several times on multiple social websites during the APA discussion period & numerous early Boreas Ponds threads. I know that I’ve mentioned it here on this forum a few times, and it was brought up many times by the Adirondack Wilderness Advocates with their efforts, and it was mentioned at several of the public APA meetings during the “alternative” discussion phase. However, the potential threat to the heritage strain didn’t seem to matter much back then, and it is clear that it still doesn’t matter much now.
It also seems clear that many people were correct that this was a pre-arranged, back-room agreement with the local towns before the state announced the purchase of the tract. Yet the state still had to go through the motions of trying to make it look like the general public would have any input on how the lands & waters should be managed, and then basically ignored the majority of the public’s input during the public comment period. The first sign that a plan had already been in place was when DEC removed all of the small trees growing on & near the dams at Boreas Ponds & LeBeir Flow during the summer of ‘16. I asked this question before, and still never got a straight answer... “How can you go ahead & perform maintenance to a dam site in an area that hasn’t even been officially classified yet, especially when all those trees where rather small and posed no immediate threat to the integrity of the dams?”
The short answer is that our governor & government clearly already had plans for this area, no matter what the majority of the general public thinks.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 08:34 PM   #235
bluequill
Member
 
bluequill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Saranac Lake
Posts: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Just an FYI this was discussed & talked about several times on multiple social websites during the APA discussion period & numerous early Boreas Ponds threads. I know that I’ve mentioned it here on this forum a few times, and it was brought up many times by the Adirondack Wilderness Advocates with their efforts, and it was mentioned at several of the public APA meetings during the “alternative” discussion phase. However, the potential threat to the heritage strain didn’t seem to matter much back then, and it is clear that it still doesn’t matter much now.
It also seems clear that many people were correct that this was a pre-arranged, back-room agreement with the local towns before the state announced the purchase of the tract. Yet the state still had to go through the motions of trying to make it look like the general public would have any input on how the lands & waters should be managed, and then basically ignored the majority of the public’s input during the public comment period. The first sign that a plan had already been in place was when DEC removed all of the small trees growing on & near the dams at Boreas Ponds & LeBeir Flow during the summer of ‘16. I asked this question before, and still never got a straight answer... “How can you go ahead & perform maintenance to a dam site in an area that hasn’t even been officially classified yet, especially when all those trees where rather small and posed no immediate threat to the integrity of the dams?”
The short answer is that our governor & government clearly already had plans for this area, no matter what the majority of the general public thinks.
Yep! Cuomo would never have given the nod to this acquisition unless it met his needs. He could care less about trout strains or mechanized use, his priority was development in the north country. A true environmentalist he is!
bluequill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 11:17 AM   #236
forest dweller
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
Or put the gate back at the main road, and close the ponds to fishing. A distance that is convenient to you in your youth may be impossible for you when you get older. Like I say, there is already a road, and the ponds are only "ponds" because of a man made dam. A lot of the distinctions leading to a " wilderness" designation are arbitrary, which I perceive as establishing "elitist cadres" often at the expense of the excluded. As all this expansion of opportunity for some is paid for from the general fund, as a resident taxpayer, I am being made to subsidize the recreation of the subset of users (many of whom are not resident taxpayers) who don't mind and/or are able to make long walks. Also, if you want to walk further, feel free. I will investigate the permit system, and drive further to get the gate key.
Maybe it's not only designated wilderness for "elitist" humans, maybe it's designated wilderness for every living thing within that boundary.

And it would still be wilderness if and when that dam gives way. Duck Hole for example.
forest dweller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 03:52 PM   #237
Neil
Kayak-46
 
Neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by forest dweller View Post
Maybe it's not only designated wilderness for "elitist" humans, maybe it's designated wilderness for every living thing within that boundary.

And it would still be wilderness if and when that dam gives way. Duck Hole for example.
Ha! Great point.

This reminds me how people say often that we are in the bear's home. But if the bear threatens (or worse) a human it becomes evident very quickly that we truly consider it to be the other way around. In other words, we consider every square foot of the land to be ours to be used for our own purposes. No matter what.
__________________
The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.
Neil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 06:26 PM   #238
geogymn
Member
 
geogymn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,899
Wilderness, where the animals are the elitist and man is but a visitor... what a concept!
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden
geogymn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 07:43 PM   #239
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,144
It will definitely be interesting to continue to document the physical & environmental changes at Boreas Ponds over the next several years since it was first opened to the public in May ‘16.
So far I’ve noted the removal of the small trees at the dams before the tract was even officially classified, and the disappearance of an old wood stove half buried in the dirt near the remains of an obvious old campsite near Second Pond. Not sure if it was historically significant or not, but lesson learned... be careful what you share on the internet.

Last edited by Justin; 09-16-2018 at 08:58 PM..
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.